GMs will propose that teams switch sides in overtime and, potentially, an ice scrape before the extra period, according to multiple reports out of the meetings. Formal recommendations would need the approval of the league's competition committee and board of governors, which next meet in June.

The thought process behind those is simple enough; switching sides means that defensemen will have to make "the long change" from the bench, which seems to lead to more goals in the second period; and better ice will lead to faster players.

Still, given that 3-on-3 overtime was on the table, and the appeal of the 3-2-1-0 standings, Tuesday's news out of Boca Raton doesn't qualify as more than incremental change. When stuff happens in the NHL, it typically doesn't happen fast — and that seems to be the case for reducing the number of games that stagnate down the stretch, then go to the shootout.

Since 2005-06, when the shootout was implemented, approximately 57 percent of overtime games have gone to a shootout, according to the league, and that's a number the GMs would like to see decline. Playoff spots are in the balance; the Capitals is a point ahead of New Jersey in standings because they have eight shootout wins to the Devils' none.

As always, the NHLPA has a say, and Mathieu Schneider told reporters that the union doesn't want to make games any longer but fewer overtimes. That rules out an extra few minutes of 3-on-3, as has been proposed. It doesn't clearly affect standing modifications, though; there, the thought is that, with an extra point at stake, teams will be less apt to settle for hanging out in overtime.

There are pros and cons for the players there, too; it's tough to imagine them signing off on a system that would decrease certain teams' shot at making the postseason, but three-point wins would mean gaps are easier to close. And hey, they want less overtimes.

That's a moot point, though; fresh ice and switching ends are what's currently passing for change. That's better than nothing, not quite something and wholly unsurprising.

Other potential recommendations:

— Widening face-off circle hashmarks to five feet to create room on either side, eliminate scrums and promote scoring opportunities. Space leads to goals, as we see when interference is called the right way.

— Stiffer penalties for centers who cheat on face-offs; they'd have to move back an extra foot, which would mean less leverage. Whatever.

— This, according to Elliotte Friedman, needs more work, but allowing more "kicked-in"/"redirected" goals was discussed. That's a great idea; if a player can knock a puck in with his skate without putting anyone in danger, he deserves a goal.